“How
can we make a monster out of a man? Unfortunately, it is quite simple.”

--George Estabrooks, Harvard PhD & Military Hypnosis Expert

In
the stunning 1962 film “The Manchurian Candidate,” Marxist forces take a
U.S. soldier behind enemy lines and turn him into a brainwashed sleeper-agent.
This “programmed” GI returns to the
States as an apparent war hero, but soon discovers his battle-exploits were
merely a
cover story invented by his communist captors to facilitate his “involuntary assassination” of
an American right-wing presidential candidate.

As strange as it may sound, I believe that a chain of events similar to this actually
happened within a year of the movie-release. Moreover, I believe these events constitute not only a dramatic
case of life imitating art, but also a harmonizing explanation for who was
ultimately responsible for a famous murder—namely, the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy in 1963 by supposed Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald.

I propose the CIA, in perpetrating
the JFK assassination through Oswald, put its own shocking
twist on the “Manchurian Candidate” theme using the ultimate technology for
“plausible deniability”—MKULTRA.

In
this modified Manchurian Candidate scenario, ex-soldier Oswald was not programmed by communists behind enemy
lines, but instead was programmed to behave as a communist and sent
behind enemy lines—by agents of his own government.

Like the soldier
in the movie-plot, Oswald's contrived status following his return to the States
would ultimately provide a cover for his involuntary assassination of an
American presidential figure. But paradoxically, Oswald's
reputation as
an apparent pro-communist would first allow him to be used as an unwitting pawn in
a series of CIA operations designed to identify and eliminate threats to the
Agency's anti-communist
operations. Accordingly, Oswald's domestic activities
as a pro-communist provocateur,
in contrast to the hero-assassin in the fictional story, would culminate in the assassination of a
leftwing presidential candidate accused of
being soft on communism.

Curiously enough, the details surrounding this violent act would
take place along the lines of a "terminal experiment," outlined in a
declassified CIA memo written prior to the crime, that involved a throw-away,
brainwashed defector-assassin. Oswald's final act as a pro-Castro sympathizer
would also take place
within the operational parameters outlined in more recently declassified memos from the
period concerning a secret plan to use the CIA's phony, pro-Castro operatives
to justify its anti-Castro project—which
Oswald was involved in—using staged acts of terrorism, including assassinations, on American
soil.

·Could
Oswald really have been a victim of the CIA’s crash mind control program (MKULTRA)
and employed as one of the numerous fake soldier-defectors we now know the US
successfully used in sophisticated, top-level Cold War operations against the
Soviet Union?

·Was
he one of the Marines we have learned military doctors skillfully programmed with pro-communist
personalities to make them convincing COINTELPRO-like
operatives for use in anti-communist espionage activities, such as those
Oswald engaged in during his event-filled pre-assassination visit to New
Orleans?

·Did
elements tied to the CIA’s Operation Mongoose plots
use apparently pro-Castro Oswald as a player in an anti-Castro assassination
operation (such as Operation
Northwoods, which was rejected by Kennedy) to assassinate a President they saw as a threat to
these covert plots? In
other words, was the plan rejected by Kennedy implemented by Oswald in killing
Kennedy?

After
reviewing the accumulated evidence, I have come to believe this is so and review
fascinating declassified data and the confessions of government insiders to
support this provocative theory in my book The
Perfect Assassin.

Indeed,
in the 40 years since the assassination we have learned much more about the
CIA’s historic use of mind control to create fake defectors, provocateurs,
and assassins than most people realize. And
this information is invaluable in weaving together seemingly contradictory
strands of evidence to converge on a coherent theory of the JFK case.

For example,
Oswald as a “programmed assassin,” incredible as it seems, was foreshadowed
to an amazing extent in a declassified CIA memo on “terminal experiments” in
mind control. Detailed information about a planned assassination experiment using
a defector was revealed in a1950s-era CIA
memorandum published by the New York Times
in 1978. The subject of the experiment would be a defector “induced”
under mind control “to perform an act, involuntarily, against a prominent
(deleted) politician or if necessary, against an American official.” The
CIA memo continued: “After the act of attempted assassination was performed,
it was assumed that the subject would be taken into custody by the (deleted)
government and thereby ‘disposed of.’”

Maybe this idea was just wishful thinking, spy
bureaucrats dreaming of novel ways to manipulate their agents to carry out
missions even “against such fundamental laws of nature as
self-preservation.” But maybe it was more than that. Examine the parallels
between this idealized CIA-backed assassination and the events which would
unfold in Dallas: Oswald, a defector, after allegedly committing the
assassination of an American official (Kennedy) was “taken into custody” by
agents of the U.S. government and shortly thereafter “disposed of” by Jack
Ruby on national television in the basement of a city jail.

For
years following the assassination, Oswald was portrayed as an unstable, lone-nut
assassin with communist sympathies, as evidenced by what his mother called his
“so-called” defection to the Soviet Union. But now we know more. Depending
on the time and place, Oswald could display either militant pro-communist or
anti-communist sympathies. Upon closer examination, this seemingly perplexing
behavior forms a pattern which points to his being a victim of the CIA’s
technology for creating “programmed” agents who, while exhibiting
pro-communist traits, were actually being used in anti-communist operations.

The
confessions of a top-level military hypnotist
named George Estabrooks provide shocking details on how fake defectors and assassins with artificially polarized personalities were
created and used for anti-communist purposes in textbook fashion through
hypnosis. The trick was to create an unwitting double
agent with a dual personality structure (one
personality a “rabid communist” the other “rabidly American and
anti-communist”) that could be worked however the CIA saw fit in its covert
war against communism. In Oswald’s case, the idea was to set him up in both
anti-communist and pro-communist roles on the highly charged Cuban issue in the
early 1960s. This would allow him to be manipulated for covert spying
operations, then, if needed, be used in a final deadly
assignment.

Despite
the labor involved in the process of creating a hypnotized double agent with a
dual personality structure, Estabrooks boasted that the rewards would be well
worth the trouble: “The proper training of a person for this role would be
long and tedious, but once he was trained, you would have a super spy compared
to which any creation in a mystery story is just plain weak.”

One use for Oswald, documents suggest, was to establish him as a
communist sympathizer so he could identify and track Kennedy-era pro-Castro
elements that might threaten U.S. preparations for invading Cuba. We now know
that the CIA used scores of phony leftists to infiltrate and disrupt suspect
groups on a grand scale throughout the 1960s. As one of the CIA’s many
‘60s-era agents provocateur, Oswald
could not only infiltrate
organizations but discredit them as well through CIA manipulation.

The pipeline was a chapter of the Fair
Play for Cuba Committee [FPCC] formed personally by Oswald. The FPCC was
an organization despised by the CIA, which conspired to monitor and discredit
it. Evidence supporting the theory of Oswald as agent
provocateurincludes the
fact that the New Orleans address printed on some of his pro-Castro FPCC
leaflets, 544 Camp Street, was also that of a violently anti-Castro “front”
organization staffed by one Guy Banister, an ex-FBI agent turned private
detective with a long history involving intelligence-related, anti-Castro
activities. Would a legitimate leftist agitator have the address of a
militant anti-communist’s office on his pro-communist literature?

Certainly
a shared address does not make Lee Harvey Oswald a double agent under the
influence of hypnosis. But it does raise suspicions, especially when considering
the numerous benefits we have learned his actions provided to the CIA and the parallels between his
behavior modes and those described by Kennedy-era documents on the use of mind
control for covert operations.

John
Marks, author of The
Search for the “Manchurian Candidate” and who has conducted
extensive research on declassified CIA documents from the Kennedy-era, disclosed
details of an illuminating CIA hypnosis operation with such a programmed double
agent sent out to spy on leftist organizations:

…Agency officials would tip off the local police that the man was a
dangerous communist agent, and he would be arrested. Through their liaison
arrangement with the police, Agency case officers would be able to watch and
even guide the course of the interrogation. In this way, they could answer
many of their questions about hypnosis on a live guinea pig who believed his
life was in danger. [emphasis added]

Marks’ description of the CIA’s proposed use of a hypnotized
informant, arrested in an orchestrated intelligence operation (Marks was himself
the victim of a CIA-orchestrated arrest while doing overseas research on CIA
operations), may shed light on an event that occurred while Oswald was in New
Orleans shortly before the Kennedy assassination.

While
brandishing a “Viva Fidel” sign and handing out“Fair Play for Cuba!” pamphlets on a street corner, a scuffle broke
out between now
“pro-Castro Oswald” and an anti-Castro Cuban on the CIA payroll whom
“anti-Castro Oswald” had
previously offered to help in overthrowing the Cuban leader. Oswald was
immediately arrested, only to be released the next day.
A New Orleans police lieutenant testified that Oswald “seemed to have
set them up, so to speak, to create an incident, but when the incident occurred
he remained absolutely peaceful and gentle.” The
anti-Castro exile with whom Oswald scuffled, Carlos Bringuier, was quoted in Life
magazine as saying: “I was suspicious of him from the start. But frankly I
thought he might be an agent from the FBI or CIA trying to find out what we were
up to.” In light of these statements and Marks’ revelation above, I
can’t help asking: What went on
in that interrogation room following Oswald’s arrest?

Oswald’s actions following this episode are intriguing with
respect to the hypothesis that he was playing a role in the CIA’s efforts to
discredit the Fair Play For Cuba Committee. He appeared on the radio to explain and defend his
Marxist views–an act that not only helped discredit the FPCC but also
established the credibility of his “Marxist traitor” role that would later
be useful in pinning the convenient elimination of
Kennedy—the enemy of the more extreme anti-Castro operatives—on a
disgruntled defector and Castro sympathizer.

Oswald
also dutifully wrote a revealing letter to the Communist Party USA to tell it
that his actions may have “compromised” the FPCC: “I feel I may have
compromised the FPCC, so you see that I need the advice of trusted. [sic] Long
time fighters for progress. Please advise.” Elsewhere in his correspondence to
the American Communist Party, Oswald cogently noted that “Our opponents could
use my background of residence in the U.S.S.R. against any cause which I join”
and that “by association, they could say the organization of which I am a
member, is Russian controled, ect [sic]. I am sure you see my point.” Indeed.

Oswald’s New Orleans summer was indeed productive. It generated
negative publicity for the FPCC and was a propaganda coup for the anti-Castroites;
it produced a paper trail supporting the agency’s professed theory of
communist subversion while simultaneously legitimizing domestic spying. Beyond
these payoffs, there was another one which–whether or not it was specifically
intended at the time–would be crucial within three months. Oswald’s
pro-Castro involvement would be a central element in the purposely crafted image
of Oswald-the-assassin.

As we have only
recently learned, Oswald's provocateur behavior would indeed dovetail
with detailed plans made at the highest levels of the US government to use the
CIA's apparently pro-Castro activists in violent activities on American soil as
part of its anti-Castro crusade.

But the synergy between Oswald’s actions and ongoing CIA operations goes back
further. There is his bizarre defection to the Soviet Union, which gave him the
“communist sympathizer” credentials to infiltrate leftist groups in the U.S.
following his return to the States.

Numerous irregularities about the episode are
consistent with the postulate that the defection was staged and monitored. For
one thing, the CIA seemed to handle Oswald’s defection with marked
indifference. Given the super-sensitive nature of the American U-2 spy-plane
information (which he brazenly offered to give to the Soviets after his
defection) Oswald supposedly had access to as a Marine stationed at a U-2 base
in Japan, a major damage assessment should have been conducted by the U.S.
intelligence agencies to determine if their prized surveillance capability had
been fatally compromised. But apparently no such assessment was undertaken.
According to the official story, Oswald was not even debriefed by the CIA when
he returned to the U.S. Nor was he prosecuted for offering to sell American
military secrets to the Soviets.

Melanson noted these suspicious facts:

The Agency claims it had no interest in Oswald and never debriefed him
upon his return from Russia. Was the CIA so simple-minded that it saw no
possible connection between Oswald and the U-2? Did it see one but forget to
follow up on it by debriefing him? Or did it already know precisely what
Oswald had told the Soviets? [emphasis added]

Researchers have proposed that Oswald’s defection
was actually part of an orchestrated CIA counterintelligence operation designed
to find a Soviet “mole” in U.S. intelligence. The CIA feared this Russian
agent was providing the Soviets damaging information on the top-secret U-2 spy
plane—the most powerful espionage tool in the CIA’s Cold War arsenal. According
to one scenario, by staging Oswald’s defection, American officials
hoped to determine how much classified information the Soviets already had on
the U-2, and as a bonus, to nail the mole.

A
recently uncovered precedent shows how this might have worked. David Wise
revealed an eerily similar operation with a fake soldier-defector named Joe
Cassidy (code-named WALLFLOWER) in his exposé Cassidy’s
Run. This sophisticated, twenty-year counterintelligence
operation began the same year Oswald defected to the Soviet Union. Dangling a
phony traitor (prepped to provide carefully chosen top-level disinformation) in
front of Soviet agents proved fantastically successful. As summarized by Wise:

By the questions the Soviets put to WALLFLOWER, the FBI and the Pentagon
discovered a good deal about what the Russians knew and did not know about
American military strength and secrets. The United States also learned more
about how the Soviets recruited and ran American agents and more about their
tradecraft techniques as well, from hollow rocks, new chemicals for secret
writing, and rollover cameras, to codes and communications. In addition, the six
Soviets sent to handle Joe Cassidy were kept busy running a controlled source,
which left them less time to recruit and run real spies.

This fascinating “Operation SHOCKER” was made easier in that it
took place on U.S. soil. How could a similar operation with a fake
defector/traitor be monitored in the Soviet Union itself? A declassified CIA
document unearthed by Dr. Colin Ross (Bluebird:
Deliberate Creation of Multiple Personality by Psychiatrists)
reveals how valuable operational information could be obtained from a hypno-programmed
field-operative himself, unwittingly playing the roles of leftist traitor and
then “loyal American”: “Once every month or at such time is advisable,
they will be contacted by a member of our intelligence department, hypnotized
and as loyal Americans will tell what they know. This sounds unbelievable, but I
assure you, it will work.”

This CIA memo echoes top-level military hypnotist George Estabrooks
who also wrote of military men being used as fake defectors in intelligence missions. In
numerous publications he pointed out the power of
hypnosis in creating convincing agents for such operations. His revelations on
how such operatives could be programmed with multiple personality structures are
as detailed as they are startling. For example, in an article entitled
“Hypnosis Comes of Age,” Estabrooks described how a pro-communist
“infiltrating” personality could be programmed within an anti-communist
“reporting” personality structure using hypnosis:

We start with an excellent subject, and he must be just that, one of
those rare individuals who accepts and who carries through every suggestion
without hesitation.... Then we
start to develop a case of multiple personality though the use of hypnotism. In
his normal waking state, which we will call Personality A, or PA, this
individual will become a rabid communist. He will join the party, follow the
party line and make himself as objectionable as possible to the authorities.
Note that he will be acting in good faith. He is a communist, or rather his
PA is a communist and will behave as such. [emphasis added]

Estabrooks went on to explain how after hypnotically inducing a pro-communist
personality, a secondary anti-communist personality could be created in
the same individual:

Then we develop Personality B (PB), the secondary personality… This
personality is rabidly American and anti-communist. It has all the
information possessed by PA, the normal personality, whereas PA does not
have this advantage. [emphasis added]

Hypnosis victims programmed with this concentric personality
structure could be used as unwitting pawns to infiltrate and then report on
pro-communist groups. According to Estabrooks, if enemy intelligence groups
“should suspect our man, and confront him with an accusation, he will be the
very model of righteousness outraged.” He continued, “He could not tell the
truth about his life as a spy because he would not know it.”

Estabrooks
even described one case in which hypnosis was used to induce
his polarized personality structure in a Marine
prior to his being given a dishonorable discharge. The ultimate purpose of
the charade was to use the unwitting Marine, in his crafted pro-communist role,
as an intelligence pawn:

During World War II, I worked this technique with a vulnerable Marine
lieutenant I’ll call Jones. Under the watchful eye of Marine intelligence I
split his personality into Jones A and Jones B. Jones A, once a “normal”
working Marine, became entirely different. He talked communist doctrine and
meant it. He was welcomed enthusiastically by communist cells, and was
deliberately given a dishonorable discharge by the Corps (which was in on the
plot) and became a card-carrying party member.[emphasis added]

Manipulating
this Marine’s artificially polarized personality structure according to his
textbook description, Estabrooks could recover information about the enemy
groups his programmed communist spy had infiltrated (as “Jones A”) by
accessing the anti-communist personality mode “Jones B”: “All I had to do
was hypnotize the whole man, get in touch with Jones B, the loyal American, and
I had a pipeline straight into the communist camp,” Estabrooks bragged.

The extent to which discharged Marine Oswald resembles
such an operative who was programmed and planted for an intelligence
mission is tantalizing. Bob Callahan described soldier
Oswald as a “a top secret Marine radar operator who worked on the U-2;
a disenchanted jarhead who spent his time spouting Marxist slogans to mysterious
women companions in expensive Japanese bars.” Compare that description to that
of another of Estabrooks’ unwitting military dupes,
an “Officer Cox” he boasted of brainwashing to play the role of defector:
“He was planted in an international café in a border country where it was
certain there would be enemy agents. He talked too much, drank a lot, made
friends with local girls and pretended a childish interest in hypnotism.”

Estabrooks
had not only described the advantages of using such unwitting, programmed
agents for espionage, he warned that such techniques could be used to
produce assassins. As he revealed in one publication:
“The key to creating an effective spy or assassin rests in splitting a man’s
personality, or creating multipersonality, with the aid of hypnotism.” He
added:“This is not science
fiction. …I have done it.” Elsewhere, Estabrooks issued an even more
explicit warning:

Is hypnosis dangerous? It can be. Under certain circumstances, it is
dangerous in the extreme. It has even been known to lead to murder. Given the
right combination of hypnotist and subject, hypnosis can be a lethal weapon.

Indeed,
hypnosis has been used as a lethal weapon. A fascinating real-life case was
described by Paul Reiter (Antisocial
or Criminal Acts and Hypnosis: A Case Study) prior to the JFK murder. It involves a hypnotized
ex-military man with ties to anti-communist extremists who was manipulated into
engaging in staged, underground leftist political activities and ultimately
committing a double murder. This is exactly what Lee Harvey Oswald, the
ex-soldier accused of killing the U.S. President (and a Dallas police officer
while on the run) is accused of doing.

Was
Oswald brainwashed through MKULTRA technology along the lines explicitly described by
Estabrooks to be used as a COINTELPRO-type operative and ultimately one of the
CIA’s involuntary assassins?

As
a result of John
Newman’s meticulous research, we now know that Oswald, the supposed
lone-nut, was under near continuous surveillance by the CIA from the time of his
defection to the assassination. And we also know that he was no stranger to
violence-prone, CIA-backed groups or even CIA assassins. But it would take
thirty years for this truth to come out. In 1993, the New York Times reported on its
front page that Oswald was under simultaneous CIA and
FBI surveillance even “as he met with the mobster the C.I.A. had hired to kill
Fidel Castro.” Since when does a “lone-nut assassin” meet with a
government hit man and then go on to kill a president (along the lines of a CIA
memo on programmed assassins) while under the near continuous surveillance of
its two most powerful intelligence agencies?

Curiously, there is documented evidence
that CIA mind-control experts studied the
option of using “Manchurian Candidate” technology on
these anti-Castro assassins. And Estabrooks specifically mentioned aggressive
Cubans as future victims of his technology. Another
CIA mind-control/assassination expert (Sheffield Edwards)
was even put in charge of the Castro assassination program in which we have
learned Oswald
played a role.

History and the declassified documents citedhere show beyond a doubt how the CIA was obsessed in the war against
communism and its Cuban persona. A massive, illegal infrastructure was put in
place to wage covert war against Castro. But, I believe, there were those tied
to the Cuba project who took their obsession one step further.

Recently uncovered documents from Operation
Northwoods reveal Kennedy had refused to approve horrifying plans from the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. As unbelievable as it sounds, the scheme intended to
blame Castro for U.S.-manufactured terrorist attacks as a pretext for a second
invasion of Cuba. Options considered as a means to “cause a helpful wave of
national indignation” included staged assassinations on American soil.

A 1961 CIA report declassified in 1998 showed that
powerful elements in the agency blamed Kennedy for their own mistakes in the
failed first invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. Couple this with the
on-the-record anti-communism hysteria and the fact that Kennedy was seen as a
threat to the entrenched command structure planning a second
invasion of Cuba (Kennedy fired CIA director Allen Dulles who later served
on the Warren Commission) and a frightening picture comes into focus: By
eliminating Kennedy and blaming it on Castro’s agents, the anti-Castro
infrastructure could not only remove a roadblock to its covert “get Castro”
policies, it could provide a justification for them.

And with that deadly scenario, enter Lee Harvey
Oswald. Oswald’s work as defector and violent pro-Castro provocateur had set him up perfectly for the role of politically
motivated assassin and fall-guy, a man
whose mind was manipulated under the pretext of the Cold War and in the end
became a microcosm of it.

Kennedy’s
assassination brought momentous changes for those waging the Cold War. The
prophetic 1954 CIA memo which outlined the mind control experiment in which an
assassin would be “induced …to perform an act, involuntarily, if necessary,
against… an American official” and then be “disposed of” while in
government custody also predicted that this experiment might be useful “as a
‘trigger mechanism,’ for a bigger project.”

Swept into power as a result of the JFK murder,
Johnson would continue the anti-Castro operation. But he would oversee a far
bigger project. Under Johnson, the covert warfare specialists would go on to use
what is now known as a manufactured terrorist attack (the Tonkin Gulf incident)
to justify the devastating escalation from covert to overt warfare in Vietnam.

Ironically, Castro would
survive, despite ongoing covert actions against him (one CIA assassination
attempt was in gear the day Kennedy was shot), but the leader of Vietnam was
less fortunate--President Diem was killed in a CIA-orchestrated coup within a
month of the JFK’s death. The Oswald-era domestic CIA/FBI actions against the
anti-war groups of the early sixties foreshadowed, if not rationalized, a
repeat, greatly magnified in scope, against the anti-Vietnam war groups. (It was
a New
York Times exposé of this latter phase of the massive, illegal surveillance
against American anti-war groups which led to our current understanding of the
earlier phase in which I propose Oswald unwittingly participated.)

My research is not meant to create a groundswell of sympathy for
Lee Harvey Oswald, nor to engage in finger-pointing four decades after an event
that changed the course of American, and world, history. Like everyone, I just
want to know what really happened that fateful November day, and more important,
why it happened. Indeed, if the past is truly prologue, the world needs to know.

It is my hope that the theory proposed from this research will not
only open the eyes of the public to the dangers of hypnosis but also provide a
new perspective on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. This “Manchurian
Candidate” hypothesis has numerous advantages over conventional theories. It
can harmonize many of the seemingly contradictory details in our current
knowledge of the assassination and synthesize heretofore-puzzling differences in
the conclusions presented by Warren Commission apologists and “conspiracy”
researchers, whom I believe are looking at two different sides of the same coin.

By taking a step back and viewing Oswald’s behavior through the
lens provided by the declassified MKULTRA, COINTELPRO and NORTHWOODS documents
as well as Estabrooks’ detailed descriptions of how Marines with polarized
personalities were created and used by intelligence agencies, an understanding
of the reasons underlying Oswald’s polarized behavior modes can be gained.
Moreover, I believe this perspective can not only depolarize the ongoing debate
but also inspire new avenues of investigation as to who was ultimately
responsible for the crime.

Indeed, if the “Manchurian Candidate” hypothesis is accurate
and Oswald alone pulled the trigger that day in Dealey Plaza, but under the
influence of CIA mind control technology (as detailed in now-declassified
documents), the false dichotomy in the ongoing investigation between
“patsy” and “lone-assassin” can be eliminated—since a programmed
assassin is the ultimate patsy—and the primary blame for the crime can be
placed at the CIA’s bloody feet.

Certainly
in light of all that has been uncovered in the four decades since the death of
the 35th President there are grounds to re-think Oswald’s role. Considering

·the scale of anti-communist covert operations those 40 years ago

·the now-apparent benefits of Oswald’s behavior to these
operations, and

·the declassified information that creates striking parallels
between Oswald’s actions and the CIA’s mind-control program to
create unquestioning operatives
to carry out such operations

I do not consider it unpatriotic to ask serious thinkers whether
Oswald really could have been used as one of these agents against our own
President.

In the wake of the 9-11 tragedy, an
act perpetrated under the direction of a “former” CIA asset
and skillfully used by the CIA to roll back legislation limiting its illegal
domestic role (enacted as a result of 60’s-era excesses described above), a
true patriot must always be alert to the CIA’s role in domestic and
international manipulation and seek to understand the various ways this may be
accomplished. Hypnosis is one of the most powerful and least understood tools in
the CIA’s arsenal. It’s time the public understood the dangers it poses to a
free democratic state.

“Only
a people who refuse to permit themselves to sink into intellectual lethargy and
conformity, only a people who question and think . . . can be sure that
hypnosis—disguised or direct—will not undermine their freedom and rob them
of their very lives.”

-George Estabrooks

============================================

For
the full story on mind control and the JFK assassination, please see

It
was my hope that my book on mind control and the JFK assassination would not
only assist in solving one of the most famous crimes of the 20th Century but
prevent similar crimes from being perpetrated by alerting the public to the
dangerous, mind-altering technology secretly developed by the CIA. In light of
the Abu Ghraib prison torture scandal in which sophisticated means of torture
(some developed in American prisons under the CIA’s infamous MKULTRA program)
were approved at thehighest
levels of government for use against many victims in Iraq,
such an alert is even more pressing today.

Indeed,
the recent revelations of systematic US torture of enemy soldiers and civilians
(including children) in
Iraq has revealed what researchers have long postulated: that the CIA's
decades-long research program of using various forms of torture as a means of
mind control was not disbanded as government spokesmen
have alleged... it has gone operational.

John
Marks, a former high-level CIA employee, warned decades ago that the Agency’s
technology, developed in a crash, covert program by the elite of America’s
psychiatric establishment, could be used not only to create "planned
destructiveness" on a personal level but to terrorize entire populations
targeted by the CIA. (As Marks concisely stated in The Search For The
"Manchurian Candidate": “MKULTRA subprojects dealt with ways to
maximize stress on whole societies”.)

The
CIA, under the MKULTRA program, conducted decades of grossly unethical tests on
the public to develop techniques—including electroconvulsive therapy, drugs,
sensory deprivation and hypnosis—to destroy and control the minds of its
victims. Now the US is torturing people throughout the world through electric
shockand sensory deprivation, among other means, which according to
the Washington
Post include "reversing the normal sleep patterns of detainees and
exposing them to heat, cold and 'sensory assault,' including loud music and
bright lights, according to defense officials."

But
there are more secret procedures being used. The Post revealed:
"The classified list of about 20 techniques was approved at the highest
levels of the Pentagon and the Justice Department, and represents the first
publicly known documentation of an official policy permitting interrogators
to use physically and psychologically stressful methods during questioning."
[emphasis added]

A
gruesome picture is coming into focus, for those with the courage and integrity
to watch. As one observer summarized the sickening revelations of the
prison-torture scandal: "the more that emerges, the less it seems to be the
work of a handful of sadists or perverts. Rather they are in line with sophisticated
techniques of modern torture."

US torture is not limited to the
Abu Ghraib prison; four other sites have already been identified and the number
of prisoners being abused is in four-figure
range. At some of these sites where prisoners were tortured
to death by US forces, lower level "patsies" were guided by private
contractors and higher-level torture experts from the CIA, with the blessing
of the US State and Defense departments. As one publication
described the situation:

"Far from being 'out of control,'
their behavior was very much controlled by their immediate superiors in military
intelligence, who were, in turn, carrying out a policy of subjugating the Iraqi
people by 'breaking' the captured cadre of the resistance and using the
intelligence gleaned from violent interrogation to round up their leaders."

Is history repeating itself? In
my book The
Perfect Assassin, I proposed that Lee Harvey Oswald was
carefully manipulated by higher forces through the application of MKULTRA
psychiatry, one aspect of which was designed to create unwitting assassins and
double-agents who would be impervious to enemy torture. If the thesis of my book
is accurate, it was Oswald's elimination of Kennedy (under the influence of CIA
mind control) that led to an expansion of the Vietnam War under Johnson. Like
the war against Castro's Cuba, the Vietnam War would be waged by the CIA with
the help of unconventional weapons, including systematic torture of civilians in
the infamous Phoenix
program. The CIA used this program to torture to death thousands, if not tens of
thousands of Vietnamese "enemies" in the search for double agents and
informants.

We didn't have the Internet or
digital cameras back then. Consequently, few in the public realized what was
really going on in Southeast Asia. This allowed the people responsible for this
reprehensible behavior to go punished. In fact, they were promoted.
William Colby,
a key player in the Phoenix torture program, went on to become the director of
the CIA. Other personnel who participated in this "pacification"
operation to root out indigenous support for peasant guerillas in Vietnam are
now at the highest levels of the Homeland Security system in the US.

In
my book, Hitler
Is Winning, I asked whether we would learn the lessons of the
past in time to prevent the great crimes from the last century being repeated.
Apparently we will not. The American recruitment and sponsorship of thousands of
Nazi war criminals to continue the mind control research they conducted in the
death-camps has paid off handsomely for US leaders. Although currently it is the
rest of the world which is bearing the brunt of the US government's systematic recruitment
of Nazi war criminals, the American public had better wake up. In light of
the Homeland Security Act, if this torture policy, approved at the highest
levels, and administered by people with experience at applying torture on a
massive scale, is not reversed, it is only a matter of time before these
techniques are used on American citizens, as they are in American occupied
territory in Cuba and Iraq.

Sound
unlikely? September 11, itself an act designed to terrorize the American public by
agents of its own government, has created a world in which "the
President can order the torture of prisoners even though it is forbidden by a
federal statute and by the international Convention Against Torture, to which
the United States is a party." (If this sentence doesn’t make you
shudder, then this article will be lost on you.)

"President Bush and his administration have used
the September 11 attacks again and again as an argument for expanded executive
power. A signal example is the claim that the President can designate any
American citizen as an 'enemy combatant' and have him or her imprisoned in
solitary confinement, indefinitely, without trial or access to counsel."

We
can only presume that an American citizen designated as an "enemy
combatant" will also be subject to the official rules allowing torture.

It
is truly a dark day for America. We must demand an end to US torture and the secrecy
surrounding it or lose what little remains of our national soul and admit
that Hitler has won after all.